My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2006-07-13
Charlottesville
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2006
>
2006-07-13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2007 10:10:14 AM
Creation date
7/25/2007 10:10:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Meeting Date
7/13/2006
Doc Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
6 <br /> Ms. Lynn Heetderks, BAR member, said she thinks it is a bad idea to consider <br />what is going to go in when considering demolitions. She said there is no guarantee of <br />what is going to go in following a demolition. She said you would have the possibility of <br />loss of an historic structure and not having what was presented be built. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brown said he feels there are legitimate concerns in the context of a complete <br />demolition. He said there are two aspects: historic preservation, which we are given <br />tools to protect, and design review to assure that new construction is compatible. Mr. <br />Brown said a complete demolition seems to rise and fall on its own merits. He suggested <br />we look at it differently in the context of a partial demolition as it is as much an alteration <br />as it is a demolition. He said the ordinance currently does not provide for this, but if it is <br />thought that this would be helpful, the ordinance could say that in partial demolitions that <br />necessitate renovation, it would be reasonable for the BAR or Council to say that when <br />the demolition application is made, the applicant should present how the portion being <br />preserved would be compatible with the new construction. Mr. Brown said a separate <br />question is if demolition begins can the City require what was approved to be completed. <br />He said that would be very difficult. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wolf questioned at what point do you effectively lose the continuity of the <br />block or streetwall when you remove part of an existing structure. <br /> <br /> Dr. Brown asked BAR members and Council if they would be comfortable <br />considering what comes next in a partial demolition request. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said he wanted to clarify that if there is an approved design, the <br />applicant cannot just build something else, it would have to be approved. He said the <br />BAR is a more qualified body to make those decisions than Council. He said he would <br />prefer to have the BAR, which has expertise, give guidance to Council. He said there is <br />also the issue of moving buildings, and he said what comes next is important and does <br />affect the fabric. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brown said that in partial demolition, plans, though not final plans, could be <br />required, which would include location, width, height, and orientation to the surrounding <br />area and the remaining portion of the building. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said the City should look at this issue in a progressive manner and <br />look to the future and find better ways to do it. <br /> <br /> Ms. Hamilton asked if the BAR looks at architecture only, or does it consider <br />stormwater and environmental issues. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wolf said the BAR can do a modern, contextual response, but other issues, <br />such as the type of housing or whether workforce opportunities are provided, are outside <br />of the purview of the BAR. <br /> <br /> Ms. Heetderks asked what constitutes partial demolition, and Ms. Mary Joy Scala, <br />Planner in Neighborhood Development Services, said she will have to check. <br /> <br /> Ms. Heetderks said she does not want to consider what comes next, and prefers a <br />stand alone, historic review. <br /> <br /> Mr. Knight said he agrees with Mr. Brown’s comments about a partial versus total <br />demolition. <br /> <br /> Ms. Adams said he would favor making a determination on a case by case basis. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tremblay said yes, he would be comfortable looking at what comes next in a <br />partial demolition. <br /> <br /> Mr. Coiner said he would not be comfortable looking at what comes next in a <br />partial demolition. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.